Safe Speed Forums

But again it's the lowest common denominator theory. Old mrs Jones has trouble keeping her car in a straight line and stopping it at anything over 40MPH...so should all speed limits be set at 40MPH?

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

[Smarmy sarcasm]
Yes. If they aren't going fast enough to K/SI each other, the increased number of idiots will simply raise the repair costs of driving for no one else but themselves.
[/Smarmy sarcasm].
This is along the lines of what I'm saying. Not everyone should be permitted to drive - especially someone who can't walk and chew bubblegum at once.

I believe a statistic previously cited here on this forum, was one in six should be retested for competence. There are times when I think it should be one in four, but oddly enough, that never happens in Manhattan.

People who completely lack any ability to drive while talking into a cellphone are a symptom of a much bigger problem. The real problem is that driver education, training, and testing in most of the civilized world usually settles for merely, if not BARELY, adequate competence.

Every unintentional motor vehicle collision is the result of a number of factors. One of the prime factors is nearly always misdirected attention within the three-to-five critical seconds prior to that collision.

A so-called 'driver' who is completely incapable of having any phonecon while driving is, in my experience, more likely to misdirect their attention outside the driving task in other ways. Removing the handy from their hands is MEANINGLESS.
If they lack the ability to decide when [or why] they should mute the phone, drop the conversation, and refocus on road and traffic ... or, in the alternative, avoid that [topic of] conversation altogether ...

I'm supposed to feel better just because some idiot who can barely drive won't crash WHILE having a phonecon?

Taking the external conversation away from people who can barely drive, is not even close to equal to improving their ability to manage distractions.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

Saw our local community plod in his marked Corsa driving while on the phone yesterday, make of that what you will.

Hell that's dangerous! It would have been safe if it had been a radio microphone, but without that curly bit of wire from the bottom of it to the transmitter...

...well, he was a menace to himself and others!

Slightly off topic but..Have they changed to procedure for approaching junctions/islands in the driving tuition these days? ...the reason I ask is that the old MSM seems to now have changed to Mirror (maybe), Manouvere and then if you're lucky a slight half hearted signal... it seems to be getting more common place round our way.

You know where the person in front of is going, way before they signal their intentions.

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

No: Just because the driver is holding a microphone instead of a mobile-phone does not make it safe.....just because it is not specifically an offence does not make it legal. There is still "driving without due care and attention".
And if it is decided that people who cannot multi-task to a degree will not be allowed to drive then most of those so "banned" will be male....females are much better at talking and performing other tasks at the same time.
If that particular bag of worms is ever opened you will then see it rapidly used to remove people who are "unable" to drive "safely" (and who decides ?)
The young driver will inevitably suffer as well....driving with his mates and with music on and with his mortality guaranteed...
And all those young women driving around chattering ten-to-the-dozen with a car full of similar...and listening to music...and checking their make-up.....and using the mobile....since women are MUCH better than men at doing loads of things at the same time they must be immune from the accident stats...and statistically THEY ARE !
So: The [accident-immune] driver of the future will be a childless, young female.
While childless young males will be consigned to public transport.
And a good thing too !

_________________
The world runs on oil, period. No other substance can compete when it comes to energy density, flexibility, ease of handling, ease of transportation. If oil didn’t exist we would have to invent it.”

56 years after it was decided it was needed, the Bedford Bypass is nearing completion. The last single carriageway length of it.We have the most photogenic mayor though, always being photographed doing nothing

IS there any research to back up that statement. My own research, conducted in the saloon bars of South Manchester, indicates the contrary. The number of barmaids who are unable to draw my pint whilst speaking to another customer is remarkable.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

What? So we didn't need the mobile phone law after all?! Just think, we had a perfectly good way of dealing with it all along and we never noticed...

But the reduction ad absurdum to that argument is that we don't need any traffic laws other than DWDCA and DD. Driving down the wrong carriageway on a motorway would be perfectly acceptable so long as you didn't inconvenience anyone. But you could be stopped by any policeman for doing anything that he didn't like.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

I never understood why we needed a law specificly for phones when we had driving without due care, maybe Fisherman can enlighten us. I think Jimmy Carr got away with it because he was using his phone to dictate a joke. Had they charged him with driving without due care surely he would have lost, but as he was charged with a law relating to a phone he got away with it. Not really what they had in mind when they brought that law in, probably in haste.

I heard Richard Hammond on the radio a few years ago, and he and James May reckon you could replace all laws with just on, which is Being A C*ck. They are of course right.

Because it is much easier to get a conviction on a matter of fact than of opinion.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

I am not condoning driving while yakking on the phone, but I assume the law was introduced to stop people crashing because they were distracted by the phone. If they are distracted then the charge of DWDC would surely result in a successful prosecution? If they are not distracted, is there a need to prosecute?

Do we need specific legislation for every conceivable thing that could distract us while driving? It would appear to be perfectly legal to drive while holding a live chicken to ones ear

I take your points, DCB, but I still wonder whether we need QUITE so many laws "just to make prosecutions easier". Adam has a point, currently, there is now specific offence of eating or drinking at the wheel, and we still hear of prosections for it. If not that, why mobiles? ESPECIALLY with the (highly contrived) exception that allows a CB to be used?

I quite agree. My post was meant to be dripping irony and sarcasm.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

Standing back and looking at those making the laws ( and also previous tenants of high office ) we note that a high percentage of those in high political office are of the legal persuasion - and indeed one previous PM's spouse possibly embarrassed him by earning more than him - but possibly because he had to divert ( like some of the rest ) to politics -to earn a living .
I'm now postulating a theory ,that good lawyers go on to become excellent QC's /barristers - the rest head for Westminster .

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

Well, clearly this guy thought he could drive and operate a mobile phone at the same time without compromising his abilities:




http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ailed.html

Surely the courts can ask the service provider for a copy of the call log in serious cases like this? Why all the uncertainty?

"...'The only explanation I can find is that you were on your mobile phone either calling your friend or texting him or reading his texts to you...."

That seems totally bizzare to me! Whilst I agree it's perfectly likely that he could well have been distracted by a phone, I find it pretty amazing that this wasn't established as a matter of fact!

Anyway, would it have been OK if she'd been killed by a policeman or a taxi driver on his 2-way radio or a trucker on his CB?

Or ,as seen today - by a police person in a panda ,trying to drive ,and use a personal radio fixed to their vest - She didn't half move between lanes trying to look at radio and road at same time -but hey -that's ok - it's done in pursuance of the law -like exceeding the limits in a police vehicle .( It must be safe -SCP say so )

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on